| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Andrea Griffin
380
   |
Posted - 2013.05.06 17:56:00 -
[1] - Quote
Mining in Eve is, right now, not an occupation that encourages player interaction or even joining a mining corporation. There is no way for an industrial group to "stake a claim" and there is very little that can be done for one industrial group to get an advantage over another. There is very little in the way of possible conflict or ownership of space.
The concept below for Mining Charters is intended to change that, but in a way that should not have a strong adverse affect on casual / solo miners. It will affect mainly high sec; I do not see these changes as having a significant impact in low sec (who mines in lowsec?), and no change in null sec where mining rights are enforced already by alliances.
The Mining Charters concept contains the following suggestions:
Changes to Mining Belts / Public Mining Areas
Ice is already moving to sites that must be scanned down in order to be accessed. Ore should move in the same direction, with the exception of the most common ore types. Veldspar, for example. Anything more rare would need to be scanned down and found.
Keeping asteroid belts as they are, and keeping them open to the public, helps ensure that new players can experience a very simple version of mining and can provide them with their current mining income, as well as a place to find belt rats.
Nothing changes to asteroid belts other than the ore that can be found.
Mining Sites
Other ore that is more rare than Veldspar should move to new mining sites. Sites should be able to be found using the mechanics that will be used for the new ice belts.
All ore located in these mining sites is considered owned by the empire which controls the solar system. Attempting to mine this ore will give the miner a suspect flag.
Mining Charters
When a mining site is found, any player inside of the site may buy a mining charter from the local authorities. The mining charter gives the player's corporation full rights to all of the ore in the site.
Charters are transferable. They may be sold to other corporations using the current contract system, or perhaps a new feature of the market. A charter may also be made "open", allowing the owner to set a fee (which may be 0 isk). Anyone who pays the fee may mine in the site until all of the ore has been mined.
Anyone who attempts to mine the ore in the site without access to the Charter will incur aggression from the corporation which owns the Charter, and anyone who has bought access to the mining site. You bought the site. It is your business to defend it.
Charters can only be bought by player corporations.
Site Size and Availability
Sites should be "scare" and "large".
Making the sites scarce will ensure that buying and holding a Charter will have real value. If there are lots and lots of sites, then it would be very easy to just find a new site for yourself. That would discourage player interaction. Making the resources "scare" will encourage palyer interaction, be it asking for permission to mine, to buy the charter, or attempting to coerce the Charter holder to give the charter to you.
Making the sits Large will help offset the scarcity and make the sites worth defending. If a site only has 2-3 hours' worth of mining with a half dozen miners, then there isn't enough ore to bother with. Large sites go hand in hand with the idea of scarcity.
Cool Stuff
- Exploration people can make income by finding sites, buying a Charter, then selling the Charter to industrial corporations.
- Real competition over resources means industrial corporations have a reason to band together. There would be safety - and access - in numbers. Players have a good reason to join player corporations.
- Being responsible for your site's security gives combat pilots a place in industrial corporations.
- Gives high sec corporations a sense of real ownership, like temporary sovereignty in miniature.
- Lone Miners can buy access to sites with an Open Charter, mine in the Veldspar belts, or maybe find their own site and mine there while selling access to others.
- The Empire factions spend a lot of resources securing solar systems. Why should they give you all that good ore for free?
- Increases player to player interaction via joining corporations, negotiating over the price of a Charter, paying to join Open charters, ore theft.
- Making sites "scarce" means that warfare against industrial corporations can have meaningful effects. Right now an industrial corporation can just pack up and move anywhere and find ore. Scarce sites can mean, "Join us, Pay Us, or Die". There's now a reason to have warfare against industrial corporations other than easy kills.
- Puts more control of Eve into the hands of the players. You can actually claim ownership of that sand!
Hm. New Kernite Mafia might be a viable alliance name with these changes. ; >
These changes could very well be the basis for an industrial expansion.
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Andrea Griffin
381
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 14:53:00 -
[2] - Quote
Daily bump since posts drop off the front page very quickly due to the massive amount of stickies.
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Davion Falcon
Those Once Loyal
51
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
I like this idea.
To be clear, you're suggesting that the first person to click "buy mining charter" inside said site gets the mining charter and only one corporation may hold a charter to a particular site?
Ruthlessness is the kindness of the wise. Never forgotten, never forgiven. |
Andrea Griffin
382
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:20:00 -
[4] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:To be clear, you're suggesting that the first person to click "buy mining charter" inside said site gets the mining charter and only one corporation may hold a charter to a particular site? That's the idea. Each site can have only one Charter which is held by a single corporation, which can then sell mining rights, transfer the charter, mine the site, etc. Or not, if that's how they want to be. : >
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Mrenda
New Eden Renegades
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 15:54:00 -
[5] - Quote
I like this.
If mining rights can be sold, I'd add that if someone incurs a "Suspect Flag" and can be attacked that defence rights are capable of being sold as well. Theoretically you could end up with enforcers and player corp belt police that ensure that no-one without rights mines in others' belts.
This could range from the people who bought into the charter having kill rights on unauthorised miners, to charter owners hiring their own police force and including them as part of the deal when buying mining rights off them, to entire contracting corps that deal with mining enforcement. |
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
99
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 17:06:00 -
[6] - Quote
I love it!
My only question is what happens when a large alliance with the man power hunts down many sites and sets the price astronomically high? It will be a PvP driver for sure but it also means gankers will be buying rights to belts simply to kill off people.
I would say put a limit on the mount of charters any single corp can hold as one time to reduce that problem.
How about making the claims cost LP to buy? Tie it to a NPC corp that is in system ( of the correct faction ) so miners will need to either do missions or recruit players that do. Making the gankers do FW to be able to buy claims would help that part too.
No stations in a system? No claim required!
Or work on a trade type system: ( I am sure there's a proper name for it )
They will sell you a mining claim but only if you hand over 0% to 10%, based on standings, of the total ore in the belt to them after a week. So you need to actually mine the ore you are paying to protect or buy the ore off the market to keep them happy. Failing to do so will get you a faction loss as well as no more claims from them for a time. ( could be based on standings as well ) |
kyrieee
Snuff Box
Urine Alliance
120
|
Posted - 2013.05.07 18:40:00 -
[7] - Quote
Davion Falcon wrote:I like this idea.
To be clear, you're suggesting that the first person to click "buy mining charter" inside said site gets the mining charter and only one corporation may hold a charter to a particular site?
I don't think it's worth arguing over specifics as CCP will be the ones deciding those anyway, but I really like the general concept. It encourages player to player interaction which is what EVE needs more of, as well as potentially some conflict. |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion
Mildly Sober
98
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 07:25:00 -
[8] - Quote
A realy good concept
I like it  |
Grunnax Aurelius
luna Oscura Clandestina Armada
The Nightingales of Hades
80
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 08:33:00 -
[9] - Quote
Excuse me while i grab my Cloaky Proteus, buy a charter, rent it out, and kill any people who decide to steal ore from the belt instead, oh look I just found a way to pick on carebears in highsec easier WOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!! If the pay the Rent on the charter I get my iskies!!!!!!!!!!!
Two Teir Carriers-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=207604&find=unread |
Little Dragon Khamez
Guardians of the Underworld
White Mountain Coalition
160
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 08:50:00 -
[10] - Quote
And what is wrong with that, they will be stealing from you and getting a suspect flag.
Anyway carebears would never steal ore as they are risk averse. |
Grunnax Aurelius
luna Oscura Clandestina Armada
The Nightingales of Hades
81
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 08:58:00 -
[11] - Quote
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:And what is wrong with that, they will be stealing from you and getting a suspect flag.
Anyway carebears would never steal ore as they are risk averse.
Idno iv come across some pretty dumb carebears in my time. And its not like im going to make the rent absurd, it will be within reason to the worth of the belt, its just those who dont wana pay are gonna loose there retriever or mackinaw
Two Teir Carriers-áhttps://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=207604&find=unread |
Hesod Adee
Perkone
Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 09:07:00 -
[12] - Quote
Instead of the charter going to whoever clicks the button first, it goes to the winner of a short auction. First to click the button will just mean bots reliably beating players in the race to click first. An auction also makes setting the price much simpler.
While the auction is in progress anyone mining should get a suspect flag. However, once the auction is finished, the only people that get to shoot illegal miners are members of the corp/alliance that hold the charter. This does three things:
- Corps have to defend their claim themselves. So if one rich corp claims more charters than they can enforce, and miners realize it, any money they spent on the charter is wasted.
- Miner hunting groups will be in competition with each other as only the group who buys the charter gets to shoot miners at that site.
- Renting the claim out to other people becomes much simpler. Just tell your members who they aren't to shoot. No need to transfer the charter from ever single site and you get to rent your site out to multiple groups at the same time.
In saying that, I'm not sure if charters are a good idea or not. |
Mr VonBraun
Relativity Industrial
22
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 09:25:00 -
[13] - Quote
This +1 |
Roime
Shiva Furnace
2696
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 09:32:00 -
[14] - Quote
Very nice idea!
Might be interesting to tie it physically to the site itself:
In order to purchase a mining charter, the site finder must deliver a Proof of Discovery to the authorities. This would be a new type of object (each PoD is unique) generated by Survey Scanner. Site finder should therefore warp to the site, get in survey scanner range, r-click a roid and choose "Issue Proof of Delivery". After the scanner has cycled, the PoD would appear in cargo, and the finder should rush to the nearest authority office.
Limited engagement between charter holder and illegal miners might be better than suspect flag.
-á- All I really wanted was to build a castle among the stars - |
Azrael Dinn
The 20th Legion
Mildly Sober
98
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 09:46:00 -
[15] - Quote
Roime wrote:Very nice idea!
Might be interesting to tie it physically to the site itself:
In order to purchase a mining charter, the site finder must deliver a Proof of Discovery to the authorities. This would be a new type of object (each PoD is unique) generated by Survey Scanner. Site finder should therefore warp to the site, get in survey scanner range, r-click a roid and choose "Issue Proof of Delivery". After the scanner has cycled, the PoD would appear in cargo, and the finder should rush to the nearest authority office.
Limited engagement between charter holder and illegal miners might be better than suspect flag.
Or how about a device similar to a sov unit / poco (only alot smaller) that you anchor on the site, put charters into it and it consumes them x amount / h with some fuel or something thus making that grid "yours". Much easier to implement i belive. Rights to do stuff on the grid can be rented from the device and who ever has set it up can control it much like an poco. |
Bakuhz
The Nightingales of Hades Holdings
The Nightingales of Hades
19
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 10:32:00 -
[16] - Quote
oh wow,
first idea of scanning down ores that are more valluable is allready there really making the other current ores more scarce is going to result in a collapse of the eve market
the supply and demand is allready pretty low since the changes of the drone alloys
vallue of a simple rock of ore is basically the same vallue per batch in minerals this simply is going to hurt the market and in a little time the industrialists are not being able to build frigates anymore for a reasonable pricing
to be exacts it would kill PvP in its existance unless your in one of the major alliance holding sov space as they secure their assets and get bears to mine for them wich with your system is going to turn the min to slave layborers
letting father time progress eve will die of boredom as pvp grows thin rememebr even that i shoot a carebear here and there one cant live without the other
as bears need to build my stuff to shoot people with they need me to shoot people so they can sell new stuff
so is the circle of eve.
taking away the buidling part is going to be more ground breaking then you think
and with the chart thing what will it going to be evey pirate has an eye for isk and kills
ill just simply wait in a cloaky ship picking juicy kills in highsec as they become flashy upon eating a rock
if mining without a charter gets you in a suspect mode i can tell you now that 80% of the carebears are quiting it as they are allreayd afraid to be shot daily by the lowlife wanna be pirates in high sec.
only thing they know of is run in fear and stop doing what is making them a even bigger target.
i say keep thinking you make interesting suggestions this one is just not one of them
http://eve.battleclinic.com/killboard/combat_record.php?type=player&name=Bakuhz#kills |
Andrea Griffin
396
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 13:40:00 -
[17] - Quote
Grunnax Aurelius wrote: its just those who dont wana pay are gonna loose there retriever or mackinaw Or they can find their own site, but yes. That's the general idea. Or, they could move to low or null (which is some ways is far safer than highsec anyway).
Bakuhz wrote:first idea of scanning down ores that are more valluable is allready there really making the other current ores more scarce is going to result in a collapse of the eve market (snip a lot of doom and gloom) I really doubt that. Scanning isn't a difficult activity and it doesn't take much time.
I would expect mineral prices to rise somewhat with this change. Good news for the miners, though - it means they make more money.
Bakuhz wrote:to be exacts it would kill PvP in its existance unless your in one of the major alliance (snip more doom and gloom) Wouldn't kill PvP either. Here's the thing: Let's pretend that mineral prices jump up 25%. That doesn't affect frigate PvP at all - a hull will still be less than a single T2 gun. It won't affect cruiser PvP for the same reason. The cost of modules and rigs are far more than the hull itself. It might put a small dent in BCs, but if you can afford to lose BCs on a regular basis then money isn't an issue for you anyway. Same for anything larger. Also note that insurance is tied to current mineral prices: Prices go up, so do insurance payouts. Yet another offset.
As far as T2 ships are concerned, the T2 components make up a large share of the total cost - so mineral prices rising won't have an effect here either.
So no, mineral prices going up (even if it jumps 20%) won't "kill PvP in its existance".
Besides, if there is a spike large enough that it causes a problem, there is a simple solution: Increase supply. Spawn more sites or have ore refine into a larger amount of minerals.
This is, by the way, the reason I suggested it be tried out on ice first. Try it out on one product, see if there are issue, and if so, correct it. Then when applied to something else, you're ready and have things in place to mitigate whatever ill effect you saw.
Bakuhz wrote:if mining without a charter gets you in a suspect mode i can tell you now that 80% of the carebears are quiting I heard that 75% of statistics are made up on the spot.
I think you missed the concept above where current asteroid belts would continue to exist, but hold only low end ore. The ore you would typically find in 1.0 and 0.9 sec system - where AFK and bot miners typically mine anyway. Their life doesn't change. If you want better ore then you're going to have to put in some effort into getting it. Nothing drastic here. If you want greater rewards you should have to put in a little more effort.
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
The Omega Industries
346
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 14:04:00 -
[18] - Quote
Andrea Griffin wrote:... a lot of snipped common sense
I like the idea. It wouldn't kill the market or pvp, as eloquently explained by Andrea. It would just add another layer to both mining and pvp and perhaps increase the cost of things by some %. Well, hulls have gone up about 100% since a year or so ago (can't remember when I last did a mass hull purchase but about that). As for 80% of carebears quitting..... I seriously doubt it. Why quit when you can buy a permit to mine? It might actually get more high sec miners to join mining corps to club together to reduce the cost of buying the mining rights, thus increasing the player interactions in high sec which is a good thing.
+1 |
Nikk Narrel
Infinite Improbability Inc
Unclaimed.
1683
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 15:12:00 -
[19] - Quote
This is an interestingly perverse idea that adds investment and ownership to industry in a new way.
That is not a criticism, simply observing how it would spin the otherwise FFA nature of mining in high sec.
I think it could be fun, if things are done right.
Cloaking being on a ten minute manual cycle timer? (Author: Bree Okanata)
Fine. As long as there is a ten minute timer for being docked in a station. Also, you can't stop moving in the game. Just add in a way so every ten minutes you are randomly warped to the nearest other player. Keeps people from going AFK. |
Alx Warlord
SUPERNOVA SOCIETY
Last Resort.
457
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 16:09:00 -
[20] - Quote
I just saw 75 charaters with almost the same name [Name]&[number from 0 to 74] undocking at the same time, warping and starting to mine....
Owning a place to mine is some what easing the life of botters and dificulting the life of new players... I don't see this feature being positive in the end...
But the idea is preaty nice.
Please read these!
> New POS system
> New SOV system |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket
Swamp Bucket Empire
756
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 16:13:00 -
[21] - Quote
im concerned that it will not drive conflict, but more a first come first serve system.
it would be a lot harder to muscle in on an already claimed belt than to defend it. Anyone wishing to contest ownership would have to acquire a suspect flag and wait to be shot at by just about anyone, the ppl attacking him may not even be the miners, so he may never get to contest the belts ownership at all.
and if u try to bring a fleet to muscle another fleet out and all go suspect, the defenders are still able to engage the attackers one by one under the suspect mechanics.
lets hope these permits are expensive
There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
kyrieee
Snuff Box
Urine Alliance
120
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 16:48:00 -
[22] - Quote
Daichi Yamato wrote:im concerned that it will not drive conflict, but more a first come first serve system.
it would be a lot harder to muscle in on an already claimed belt than to defend it. Anyone wishing to contest ownership would have to acquire a suspect flag and wait to be shot at by just about anyone, the ppl attacking him may not even be the miners, so he may never get to contest the belts ownership at all.
and if u try to bring a fleet to muscle another fleet out and all go suspect, the defenders are still able to engage the attackers one by one under the suspect mechanics.
lets hope these permits are expensive
Well you could require the anchoring of some module in order to mine in the belt. That has a purchasable killright equivalent to the price of what the miners paid for the belt initially. So someone can pay a fee to contest your belt. |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket
Swamp Bucket Empire
756
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:09:00 -
[23] - Quote
kyrieee wrote:
Well you could require the anchoring of some module in order to mine in the belt. That has a purchasable killright equivalent to the price of what the miners paid for the belt initially. So someone can pay a fee to contest your belt.
ummm...POS bashing on belts?
or mini decs against corps over mining belts only without a 24 hour waiting period (ha ha yes!)
There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
Andrea Griffin
398
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:23:00 -
[24] - Quote
Alx Warlord wrote:Owning a place to mine is some what easing the life of botters and dificulting the life of new players... I don't see this feature being positive in the end... We shouldn't design or not design game features because of what bots might or might not do; CCP's security team is responsible for handling that situation. Also, please report those accounts as bot accounts. It really does help.
That said: This change wouldn't affect or protect botters at all. They will continue to warp to public belt X and go on their merry way with loads of Veldspar. You can still suicide gank them all you want (and I encourage you to do so).
If the bots want to use a scanned-down site with better ore, then:
1. They must be a member of the corporation that owns the belt, opening them up to war declarations; or
2. They must pay the person who scanned the site in order to mine there (hey, at least you get something out of it); or
3. They just go mine the site anyway, at the risk of being blown up by the owner.
But I imagine they'll just hug public belts as they do now and go about their merry way.
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Andrea Griffin
398
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:25:00 -
[25] - Quote
kyrieee wrote:Well you could require the anchoring of some module in order to mine in the belt. That has a purchasable killright equivalent to the price of what the miners paid for the belt initially. So someone can pay a fee to contest your belt. I like this idea as well. My only concern is that people looking for easy kills will attack the structure for the sake of shooting people instead of control over the resource.
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
kyrieee
Snuff Box
Urine Alliance
121
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:31:00 -
[26] - Quote
Well, you could always give them a suspect timer for shooting it |
Daichi Yamato
Swamp Bucket
Swamp Bucket Empire
756
|
Posted - 2013.05.08 17:35:00 -
[27] - Quote
Andrea Griffin wrote:kyrieee wrote:Well you could require the anchoring of some module in order to mine in the belt. That has a purchasable killright equivalent to the price of what the miners paid for the belt initially. So someone can pay a fee to contest your belt. I like this idea as well. My only concern is that people looking for easy kills will attack the structure for the sake of shooting people instead of control over the resource.
that was actually the best part of it. u shouldnt have the rights to something without having to defend it and urselves.
having rights to a belt should make u vulnerable to attack. the worst possible outcome (imho) of this proposal is invulnerable miners mining invulnerable belts. because that IS a first come first serve system and not conflict at all.
There are no vets in EVE. Only varying levels of Noobery. |
Andrea Griffin
400
|
Posted - 2013.05.09 21:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
Bump for more visibility / discussion.
It seems that the core concept has broad appeal, it's the specifics that need hammered out (as above).
There's a couple ideas floating around for staking claim:
1. Purchase mining rights from an NPC group; rights can be bought and sold. With sites being "Scare" war declarations between mining corporations would have some effect at giving one group an advantage over another.
2. Anchoring a structure that needs to be attacked. Anyone can lay claim to a site and anyone can contest the site. This provides more potential conflict (I worry that it might be too much).
3. (From FHC) A module fit on a ship, instead of a structure, is what provides a claim over a site. This would prevent people from keeping a claim after having logged off which is handy.
Ultimately CCP would decide but we can keep arguing about it here. We might come up with something brilliant. : >
CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
hmskrecik
TransMine Group
German Information Network Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 06:40:00 -
[29] - Quote
The idea is nice but I see a nasty way to exploit it.
What prevents sufficiently large corp/alliance from scanning and claiming all those sites out there (you said they are to be scarce, so it should be doable) and then... doing nothing? Or just waiting in cloaky Proteuses, like one poster mentioned?
|
Choc talar
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
11
|
Posted - 2013.05.10 07:00:00 -
[30] - Quote
I like the idea so +1
This would add some interesting dynamics to war decs and their after math. As they sit now, a war dec just ends, its over, its finished, no more pew pew. There is nothing in place for signing treaties etc. This system could add these things. A war is started by corp A against corp B for mining rights etc, Corp A wins and as part of the treaty deal corp B is now forced to give the mining charter over to Corp A. or some amount of valuable charters etc. Wars now become something with a purpose and a definite reason behind them (in High sec anyway since null has sov mechanics). If you can defend your stake you keep it, if you can't you lose it. Botters would quickly lose since they lack the ability to fight back. This could easily drive more high sec wars into existence as well as the need for indy corps to band together and work together as alliances etc.
Adding a mechanic that allows chartered belts to rented out would also be nice. Corp A pays a fee to Corp B and they are allowed to mine there without being flagged (I am sure some sort of mechanic could be worked out). This could also lead to a new profession line of charter trading or some such.
I would add something more than just a one time charter fee however. make it similar to sov mechanics where there has to be an upkeep fee paid in order to keep the charter active which would make it so that the belt would have to be mined to turn a profit rather than just horded.
Something like this could also possibly lead to mining platforms being placed at a belt similar to moon mining. Just an idea here and it may not work and if done I would make the platforms a rather expensive investment thereby driving dedication into the mix. A destroyed platform during a war would become a hefty loss which would again drive wars.
CCP has already stated (in the new video released at fanfest) that the idea of capsuleers challenging the empires, and this could be a means of kicking some of this challenge off as corps and alliances begin to own pieces in high sec. Again good idea and a needed boost to the hated mining profession. |
| |
|
| Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |